OMHRA Spring Conference 2011 Case Law Update - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Omhra spring conference 2011 case law update
1 / 59

  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

OMHRA Spring Conference 2011 Case Law Update. Michael Kennedy and Stephen Goodwin . Legislation. AODA Update. What is the AODA? Fundamental purpose to make Ontario fully accessible by 2025 Five accessibility standards customer service - in force

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.

Download Presentation

OMHRA Spring Conference 2011 Case Law Update

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript

Omhra spring conference 2011 case law update

OMHRA Spring Conference 2011Case Law Update

Michael Kennedy and Stephen Goodwin



Aoda update

AODA Update

  • What is the AODA?

    • Fundamental purpose to make Ontario fully accessible by 2025

    • Five accessibility standards

      • customer service - in force

      • built environment – Standard approved May 2010 – awaiting MCSS to pass regulation

      • transportation; information and communications; and employment – rolling into one standard - review just ended October 16, 2010

Aoda update1

AODA Update

  • Customer Service Standard

    • In force for public sector as of Jan 1, 2010; private sector and not-for-profit by January 1, 2012

  • Can apply now to private sector if acting as agent or third party for public sector organization

  • Establish policies, practices and procedures based on principles:

    • goods and services provided in manner that respects dignity;

    • provision must be integrated to enable disabled person to use goods or service;

    • equal opportunity for disabled persons to use and benefit from goods or service

Aoda update2

AODA Update

  • Customer Service Standard cont’d

    • entrance accompanied by guide dog or other animal, and to keep the animal with them, and if the animal is otherwise excluded by law, to ensure that other measures are available

    • assistive devices, notice of temporary disruptions, feedback processes and complaint procedures

    • training for staff

    • Feedback process

    • accessibility report

    • time & resources!

Aoda update3

AODA Update

  • Employment Accessibility Standard

    • now included in one standard with Information and Communication as well as Transportation

    • Review ended October 16, 2010

    • Employment Standard sets out specific requirement for the recruitment, assessment, selection, hiring, retention and separation and termination from employment

    • Will apply to all employers in Ontario

When deadlines

When Deadlines?

  • Large Public: January 1, 2014

  • Small Public: January 1, 2015

  • More information @

Bill 160 occupational health safety amendment act 2011

Bill 160 – Occupational Health & Safety Amendment Act, 2011

  • New training and certificate requirements

Bill 122 broader public sector accountability act 2010

Bill 122 – Broader Public Sector Accountability Act, 2010

  • Not apply to municipalities, however…

Wsib work reintegration policies

WSIB Work Reintegration Policies

Responsibilities of Workplace Parties

More active WSIB role

RTW Plan expectations

“Duty to Accommodate”

Penalty system if failure in RTW obligations

Work Transition Services

NEER Window – to FOUR years starting with 2008 DOA

The budget

The Budget

  • It’s all about the politics

Nra60 for fire fighters

NRA60 for Fire Fighters

  • Expect a bill passed this Spring

  • It will be messy



Gtaa decision

GTAA Decision

  • Divisional Court

  • Makes Shime’s Decision legitimate

Omhra spring conference 2011 case law update


  • Facts

Omhra spring conference 2011 case law update


  • Future Loss

  • Mental Distress

  • Punitives

George brown v opseu

George Brown v. OPSEU

  • Discharge for incompetence

Sheridan college v opseu

Sheridan College v. OPSEU

  • Discharge for unauthorized and inappropriate use of employer’s computer network

Cambridge towel

Cambridge Towel

  • Discharge of 17 year employee for performance issues

Hendrickson springs v usw

Hendrickson Springs v. USW

  • Contracting Out Grievance

Carillion services v cupe

Carillion Services v. CUPE

  • Dispute over documentation to be removed from file

Chatham kent v ona

Chatham-Kent v. ONA

  • Post Age 64 benefits issue

Air canada nra60 case

Air Canada NRA60Case

  • Federal Court grant judicial review of CHRT Decision

Interest arbitration

Interest Arbitration

  • Participating Hospitals v. SEIU

  • ATB of 2%

Employment law

Employment Law

Van mensel v walpole island first nation

Van Mensel v. Walpole Island First Nation

  • Contract interpretation issue

Russo v kerr

Russo v. Kerr

  • Motion for summary judgment related to constructive dismissal

Beggs v westport foods

Beggs v. Westport Foods

  • Lawyer letter ends employment relationship

Serbanescu v spam manufacturing

Serbanescu v. Spam Manufacturing

  • Reasonable notice

Love v acuity investment

Love v. Acuity Investment

  • Reasonable notice

Robertson v manitoba keewatinowi

Robertson v. Manitoba Keewatinowi

  • Vicarious liability over employee alleging sexual assault

Employment standards

Employment Standards

Frustration of contract under the esa

Frustration of Contract under the ESA

  • Unionized employees seeking severancewhen employer has not taken steps to terminate

    • severance

    • notice

    • time limits

St joseph s general hospital and ona

St. Joseph’s General Hospital and ONA

134 L.A.C.(4th) 86. Luborsky dismisses grievance - insufficient medical evidence

148 L.A.C.(4th) 326. New medical evidence. Randall finds meets definition of severance “unable to continue employing the employee”

not an issue that cba does not have deemed termination clause and allowed for continued seniority when absent due to illness

H e vanhatter ltd

H.E. Vanhatter Ltd.

169 L.A.C. (4th) 400 (Reilly)

5 year deemed termination clause meant employee absent less than 5 years, not entitled to severance. Employee absent more than 5 years entitled to severance due to frustration.

H e vanhatter ltd1

H.E. Vanhatter Ltd.

“On the question of pay in lieu of notice: the collective agreement provides the notice and it is for a period of five years. Therefore Mr. St. Pierre is entitled to receive his severance pay and not his pay in lieu of notice and I so find.”

Tembec enterprises inc

Tembec Enterprises Inc.

92 C.L.A.S. 350 (Harris)

following LMR, employee started working for another employer

Employer said “Quit”

Harris said severed/terminated due to frustration and entitled to both severance and pay in lieu of notice

Divisional Court overturned on the basis no evidence employee couldn’t be accommodated

William osler health centre and ona

William Osler Health Centre and ONA

179 L.A.C. (4th) 143 (Shime)

bundle of benefits under the cba not a greater right or benefit to severance

amount of severance owing not decided



[2010] O.L.A.A. No. 617 (Jesin)

[2010] O.L.A.A. No. 679 (Chauvin)

[2010] O.L.A.A. No. 680 (Chauvin)

[2010] O.L.A.A. No. 681 (Chauvin)



Chauvin – dismisses preliminary objection on timeliness

Does not decide issue of termination pay

Jesin – dismisses preliminary objection on timeliness

“It is not entirely clear to me that the grievor is entitled to termination pay”

Emrick plastics

Emrick Plastics

[2010] O.L.A.A. No. 575 (Crljenica)

Employee injured 2000, modified work until 2002

Off since 2002

Awarded NEL 2003

2005 LMR declined – not employable

Grievance filed 2009

Dismissed – frustrated in 2005 – well beyond cba and ESA time limits

Human rights

Human Rights

De abres v humber institute of technology

De Abres v. Humber Institute of Technology

  • Accommodation of disabled employee with cancer

Atu v city of mississauga

ATU v. City of Mississauga

  • Arbitration award regarding alcoholic employee

Watson v caw

Watson v. CAW

  • HRTO decision regarding retirement package offer

Ottawa hospital v cupe

Ottawa Hospital v. CUPE

  • Arbitration decision regarding attendance management

Opseu v seneca college

OPSEU v. Seneca College

  • Religious leave issue

Mcintosh v metro aluminum

McIntosh v. Metro Aluminum

  • “Sexting” – text message flirting case

Ford v nipissing university

Ford v. Nipissing University

  • Was response to human rights violation adequate?



R v cole court of appeal case

R. v. Cole Court of Appeal Case

  • Need to review policy regarding computers

Jones v tsiga

Jones v. Tsiga

  • No tort of invasion of privacy

Social media

Social Media

Lougheed imports v ufcw

Lougheed Imports v. UFCW

  • BCLRB case regarding face book comments

Windsor essex catholic district school board v lentini

Windsor-Essex Catholic District School Board v. Lentini

  • Defamation arising from Face Book comments

Pay equity

Pay Equity

  • Are you compliant?

  • Really?

  • Seriously?

Pay equity1

Pay Equity

  • Commission more active

  • Spot Audits

  • Unions going after it

Interest awarded

Interest Awarded

  • January 1, 1990 Compliance Date

  • Interest Rate 12%

  • No time limits

Omhra spring conference 2011 case law update1

OMHRA Spring Conference 2011Case Law Update

Michael Kennedy and Stephen Goodwin

  • Login